Literature DB >> 30985155

Signaling when no one is watching: A reputation heuristics account of outrage and punishment in one-shot anonymous interactions.

Jillian J Jordan1, David G Rand2.   

Abstract

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported online in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology on Jul 22 2019 (see record 2019-43753-001). In the article, a printer error did not enable the authors to correct various errors before publication. Tables 1 and 2 have been corrected. All versions of this article have been corrected.] Moralistic punishment can confer reputation benefits by signaling trustworthiness to observers. However, why do people punish even when nobody is watching? We argue that people often rely on the heuristic that reputation is typically at stake, such that reputation concerns can shape moralistic outrage and punishment even in one-shot anonymous interactions. We then support this account using data from Amazon Mechanical Turk. In anonymous experiments, subjects (total n = 8,440) report more outrage in response to others' selfishness when they cannot signal their trustworthiness through direct prosociality (sharing with a third party)-such that if the interaction were not anonymous, punishment would have greater signaling value. Furthermore, mediation analyses suggest that sharing opportunities reduce outrage by influencing reputation concerns. Additionally, anonymous experiments measuring costly punishment (total n = 6,076) show the same pattern: subjects punish more when sharing is not possible. Moreover, and importantly, moderation analyses provide some evidence that sharing opportunities do not merely reduce outrage and punishment by inducing empathy toward selfishness or hypocrisy aversion among non-sharers. Finally, we support the specific role of heuristics by investigating individual differences in deliberateness. Less deliberative individuals (who typically rely more on heuristics) are more sensitive to sharing opportunities in our anonymous punishment experiments, but, critically, not in punishment experiments where reputation is at stake (total n = 3,422); and not in our anonymous outrage experiments (where condemning is costless). Together, our results suggest that when nobody is watching, reputation cues nonetheless can shape outrage and-among individuals who rely on heuristics-costly punishment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30985155     DOI: 10.1037/pspi0000186

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol        ISSN: 0022-3514


  12 in total

1.  Psychological Science in the Wake of COVID-19: Social, Methodological, and Metascientific Considerations.

Authors:  Daniel L Rosenfeld; Emily Balcetis; Brock Bastian; Elliot T Berkman; Jennifer K Bosson; Tiffany N Brannon; Anthony L Burrow; C Daryl Cameron; Serena Chen; Jonathan E Cook; Christian Crandall; Shai Davidai; Kristof Dhont; Paul W Eastwick; Sarah E Gaither; Steven W Gangestad; Thomas Gilovich; Kurt Gray; Elizabeth L Haines; Martie G Haselton; Nick Haslam; Gordon Hodson; Michael A Hogg; Matthew J Hornsey; Yuen J Huo; Samantha Joel; Frank J Kachanoff; Gordon Kraft-Todd; Mark R Leary; Alison Ledgerwood; Randy T Lee; Steve Loughnan; Cara C MacInnis; Traci Mann; Damian R Murray; Carolyn Parkinson; Efrén O Pérez; Tom Pyszczynski; Kaylin Ratner; Hank Rothgerber; James D Rounds; Mark Schaller; Roxane Cohen Silver; Barbara A Spellman; Nina Strohminger; Janet K Swim; Felix Thoemmes; Betul Urganci; Joseph A Vandello; Sarah Volz; Vivian Zayas; A Janet Tomiyama
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2021-10-01

2.  Staying the course: Decision makers who escalate commitment are trusted and trustworthy.

Authors:  Charles A Dorison; Christopher K Umphres; Jennifer S Lerner
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2021-09-02

3.  Negative partisanship is not more prevalent than positive partisanship.

Authors:  Amber Hye-Yon Lee; Yphtach Lelkes; Carlee B Hawkins; Alexander G Theodoridis
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2022-05-19

4.  Direct punishment and indirect reputation-based tactics to intervene against offences.

Authors:  Catherine Molho; Junhui Wu
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2021-10-04       Impact factor: 6.237

5.  Reputation and punishment sustain cooperation in the optional public goods game.

Authors:  Shirsendu Podder; Simone Righi; Francesca Pancotto
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2021-10-04       Impact factor: 6.237

6.  Does suffering suffice? An experimental assessment of desert retributivism.

Authors:  Paul C Bauer; Andrei Poama
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-20       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Using the VIA Classification to Advance a Psychological Science of Virtue.

Authors:  Robert E McGrath; Mitch Brown
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2020-12-07

8.  Third-Party Punishment or Compensation? It Depends on the Reputational Benefits.

Authors:  Zhuang Li; Gengdan Hu; Lei Xu; Qiangqiang Li
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-05-28

9.  "Watching Eyes" Triggers Third-Party Punishment: The Role of Emotion Within the Eyes.

Authors:  Mingping Li; Chenyu Shangguan; Huqing Shi; Jiamei Lu
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-07-15

10.  Downstream Consequences of Post-Transgression Responses: A Motive-Attribution Framework.

Authors:  Mario Gollwitzer; Tyler G Okimoto
Journal:  Pers Soc Psychol Rev       Date:  2021-04-22
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.